Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the head the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police made it clear that the government's prisons agenda is unbalanced. He said, “Is there a balance needed? Absolutely”. Police chiefs know that keeping our streets safe must include a strategy for crime prevention, something they say that Bill C-10 just does not do.

Why are the Conservatives dead set on ignoring our police chiefs and ramming through this unbalanced prisons agenda?

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where the hon. member has been but we have had a complete approach. Our national crime prevention strategy, the national anti-drug strategy, the aboriginal justice system and drug courts are all part of it. However, getting tough on violent criminals is also part of our agenda and I am very proud of our complete approach in this area.

Mr. Speaker, ignoring our chiefs of police is a new low. The government is about to pass an irresponsible prisons agenda that our top cops insist lacks the proper balance. Police officers say that they cannot keep communities safe without a focus on crime prevention. The provinces are saying the same thing and so is the opposition and yet the government refuses to listen.

Why does the government not care what our chiefs of police think about crime prevention? Why is it burdening provincial budgets with this unbalanced approach?

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate every attempt to get tough on crime will not have the support of the NDP. However, I am very pleased and proud of the support that we have received from police and police chiefs. He can selectively quote whatever he wants but law enforcement agencies across this country know that we are on the right track, that we are standing up for victims and that we are giving them the tools they need to fight crime in this country.

Mr. Speaker, this government is preparing to eliminate all restrictions on extremely dangerous firearms, such as long-range rifles and semi-automatic assault weapons. Consequently, it will be easier to purchase such deadly weapons as the Steyr HS .50, which can pierce a bulletproof vest from a distance of over 1.5 km. The Conservatives are eliminating tools that the police need to protect us.

Will the Conservatives undertake to maintain control over the sale of weapons used primarily to commit crimes?

Candice BergenParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, it is very disappointing that the NDP is left with no argument to defend the long gun registry and resorts to trying to mislead Canadians. There are no changes in Bill C-19 with regard to the classifications of firearms, to licensing, or to the requirements to have a licence to purchase or transfer a firearm. The NDP needs to stop trying to mislead Canadians and tell the truth.

Mr. Speaker, why should I expect an answer that makes sense from a completely senseless government that will not listen to reason?

There is no justification for eliminating restrictions on powerful weapons that have absolutely nothing to do with hunting. The Conservatives could not care less about the advice of the RCMP, the provinces and their own advisors, who are saying that Bill C-19 will increase the sale and trafficking of illegal weapons. This is not coming from me, but from them.

Why do the Conservatives want to make things easier for criminals at any cost?

Candice BergenParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, we were very pleased to hear from front-line officers over the last couple of weeks who overwhelmingly supported abolishing the long gun registry. They have asked us to get tough on violent criminals and those who prey on our children, which is what we are asking the NDP to support instead of trying to perpetuate this misleading information regarding Bill C-19, which will not change classifications of firearms, licensing requirements or transfer requirements.

Mr. Speaker, this government lacks vision. Rather than working with the NDP to quickly pass Bill C-315 to protect the language rights of Quebeckers working in federal works, undertakings or businesses, the Conservatives instead announced that they would be setting up a committee about which we know nothing.

Coming from a government that has invoked closure eight times since Parliament resumed, this announcement has us doubting the government's motives.

Mr. Speaker, the French language is an integral part of our history, our identity and our daily life. We are very proud of it. French is one of the founding languages of Canada.

However, we must not confuse the issue. The NDP has not done its homework and is now proposing to create useless and cumbersome paperwork for these entities. We have to be serious about this matter and conduct consultations to see whether there is a problem with the language of work at private entities that come under federal jurisdiction. That is what we will do and we will do it the right way.

Mr. Speaker, I feel like I am watching an improve skit set up by Yvan Ponton.

The Conservatives are proposing to set up a committee with an unspecified mandate, unknown membership and an undetermined budget. That is a waste of time and money.

Do they not know that by voting with us at second reading, they will send the bill to a committee already funded by the House?

If the Conservatives are serious about this and really want to protect the French language in federally regulated businesses, why do they not vote with the NDP to send Bill C-315 to the Standing Committee on Official Languages?

Mr. Speaker, the NDP should first do its homework instead of inventing situations to get the day's news clip by improvising policies about such a sensitive issue. What we must do is conduct consultations. That is why we will strike an advisory committee to conduct consultations about whether the language of work is an issue in federally regulated private businesses. We will do this the right way. It is not true that we will bungle the job on such a sensitive issue for purely partisan and political reasons.

Mr. Speaker, after pressure from the Ontario New Democrats, the McGuinty government has agreed to extend the deadline for the stimulus program for three Hamilton projects and is now calling on the federal government to be reasonable and grant the same common sense extension.

These projects are vital to Hamilton. Will the government be reasonable and grant the extension?

Mr. Speaker, like we have said before, the date has to be respected. It was over two and a half years to deliver thousands of projects all around this country, which what most municipalities have done. I am sorry but the date was the date and it is over.

Mr. Speaker, recently, the Conservative government has shown a big appetite to change long-standing institutional names, so I might suggest one: changing the minister responsible for EI from “employment insurance” to “erroneous information” because last week, in the Charlottetown Guardian, she stated, inaccurately, regarding EI, “We are currently averaging 23 days for speed of the first payment”.

She now knows full well that what she said was totally untrue. Could she tell the House today how long it is taking people who are eligible for EI to get their first payment?